Villareal v. State Dept. of Transportation – Loss of Parental Consortium
Villareal v. State Dept. of Transportation, 160 Ariz. 474, 774 P.2d 213 (1989).
NATURE OF THE CASE: This lawsuit was a consolidation of three cases on the issue of whether children were allowed to maintain actions for loss of consortium.
FACTS: The State Department of Transportation was repairing a state highway when Garcia crashed his motorcycle into the construction site. Garcia suffered severe personal injuries and sued the state for negligence for failure to safely and properly warn motorists of the highway maintenance activities. A court-approved settlement was reached and a release discharging the state of claims of any kind was signed. The settlement agreement bound Minnie Garcia as guardian and conservator for Garcia, their heirs, next of kin, executors, personal representatives or assigns. Vivian, the mother and guardian then sued on behalf of all the minor children of Garcia for loss of parental consortium. The trial court granted the State’s motion for summary judgment holding that children do not have a cause of action for loss of parental consortium and the plaintiffs appealed.
ISSUE: Does a child have the right to sue for loss of parental consortium?
RULE OF LAW: Yes. A child has the right to sue for loss of parental consortium.
HOLDING AND DECISION: Society has increased recognition and awareness of children as persons with rights. The United States Supreme Court has recognized the right of children to due process and equal protection. Our state has enacted a number of provisions designed to protect children’s rights including foster care review boards, automatic wage assignments and child support guidelines, registration requirements for childcare personnel, and special sentencing provisions for dangerous crimes against children.
Children have a right to enjoy a mutually beneficial relationship with their parents. It is the parent child relationship which most deserves protection and which has received such protection in the past. The loss of love, care, companionship and guidance of a parent can severely affect a child’s development and have a major influence on that child’s welfare and personality throughout life. Proper jury instructions and special verdicts can eliminate the risk of double recoveries.
The foreseeability of harm to a victim’s children is as equally foreseeable as harm to the victim’s spouse. We limit our definition of parent to biological and adoptive parents and therefore injuries to siblings, grandparents or friends or other relatives do not qualify for recovery. This action is limited to serious losses wherein the parent is unable to provide love, care, companionship and guidance to the child. The impairment must be so overwhelming and severe that the parent child relationship is destroyed or nearly destroyed.